Search

Simple Summary Vulvar cancer is a difficult clinical condition to treat. Although it is not one of the most frequently diagnosed cancers, its incidence is not negligible. Treatment depends on the extent of the disease and is currently based on surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy. The combination of these possible treatments, in the context of multidisciplinary discussions, is crucial. In this paper we present a review of the data available in the literature on the role of chemotherapy in the treatment of vulvar cancer, with a look at future perspectives. Abstract The actual role of chemotherapy in vulvar cancer is undeniably a niche topic. The low incidence of the disease limits the feasibility of randomized trials. Decision making is thus oriented by clinical and pathological features, whose relevance is generally weighted against evidence from observational studies and clinical practice. The therapeutic management of vulvar cancer is increasingly codified and refined at an individual patient level. It is of note that the attitude towards evidence sharing and discussion within a multidisciplinary frame is progressively consolidating. Viable options included in the therapeutic armamentarium available for vulvar cancer patients are frequently an adaption from standards used for cervical or anal carcinoma. Chemotherapy is more frequently combined with radiotherapy as neo-/adjuvant or definitive treatment. Drugs commonly used are platinum derivative, 5-fluorouracil and mitomicin C, mostly in combination with radiotherapy for radiosensitization. Exclusive chemotherapy in the neo-/adjuvant setting comprises platinum-derivative, combined with bleomicin and methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil, ifosfamide or taxanes. In advanced disease, current regimens include cisplatin-based chemoradiation, with or without 5-fluorouracil, or doublets with platinum in combination with a taxane. Our work is also enriched by a concise excursus on the biologic pathways underlying vulvar cancer. Introductory hints are also provided on targeted agents, a rapidly evolving research field.

Pathological complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) can predict better survival outcomes in patients with early triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), Programmed Death-Ligand 1 (PD-L1), and Cluster of Differentiation 73 (CD73) are immune-related biomarkers that can be evaluated in the tumor microenvironment. We investigated if the contemporary expression of these biomarkers combined in a tissue immune profile (TIP) can predict pCR better than single biomarkers in TNBC. Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), CD73 expression by cancer cells (CC), and PD-L1 expression by immune cells (IC) were evaluated on pre-NACT biopsies. We defined TIP positive (TIP+) as the simultaneous presence of TILS &ge, 50%, PD-L1 &ge, 1%, and CD73 &le, 40%. To consider the effects of all significant variables on the pCR, multivariate analysis was performed. Akaike information criterion (AIC) and Bayesian information criterion (BIC) were used for model selection. We retrospectively analyzed 60 biopsies from patients with TNBC who received standard NACT. Pathological complete response was achieved in 23 patients (38.0%). Twelve (20.0%) cases resulted to be TIP+. The pCR rate was significantly different between TIP+ (91.7%) and TIP&minus, (25.0%) (p &lt, 0.0001). Using a multivariate analysis, TIP was confirmed as an independent predictive factor of pCR (OR 49.7 (6.30&ndash, 392.4), p &lt, 0.0001). Finally, we compared the efficacy of TIP versus each single biomarker in predicting pCR by AIC and BIC. The combined immune profile is more accurate in predicting pCR (AIC 68.3, BIC 74.5) as compared to single biomarkers. The association between TIP+ and pCR can be proposed as a novel link between immune background and response to chemotherapy in TNBC, highlighting the need to consider an immunological patients&rsquo, profile rather than single biomarkers.